Health Care Passed: A Republican Waterloo?


The House passed the Senate version of healthcare yesterday, as you are all no doubt aware. I'm deeply ambivalent about the bill. But that's a moot point now, isn't it?

David Frum has some interesting comments about the passage of health care I thought worthy of passing along:

It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But:

(1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs.

(2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this debacle now.

So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now comes the hard lesson:

A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994.

Only, the hardliners overlooked a few key facts: Obama was elected with 53% of the vote, not Clinton’s 42%. The liberal block within the Democratic congressional caucus is bigger and stronger than it was in 1993-94. And of course the Democrats also remember their history, and also remember the consequences of their 1994 failure.

This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none.

Read the rest, here. Any thoughts?


Sean Paul Kelley March 22, 2010 - 9:44am
( categories: USA: Domestic Issues )

of self described progressives supported this bill. Moveon.org raised over $5 million to primary those democratic representatives who opposed this legislation (which shook Stupak loose). Howard Dean supported this legislation and led rallies in the capital. Roger Moore supports this legislation.

If anyone bothers to read the legislation the historic import of the bill is readily apparent. The immediate benefits, that begin the day Obama signs the legislation will have tremendous life saving benefits for the sickest Americans. Healthcare will be provided to an additional 31 million people over the next four years. Psychologically the fact is the United States Government is responsible for the provision of healthcare, and healthcare is a right of all Americans.

As a bonus, the entire student loan program was nationalized, with all student loan lending originating with the Federal Government, with a cost savings of 20% or more to students. All fees and excess profits from private lenders for student loans is now illegal.

David Frum also lamented the fact that Republicans listened to their loony fringe right and walked away from this legislation. He lamented the fact that Republicans can likely no recover from this disaster FOR THEM.

Here is why Frum is so dejected:

If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.

So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours.

This win for Democrats will energize the very loony fringe right base that will make Republicans even more irrelevant. The win cannot be underestimated. Obama will begin to take on an air of invincibility, and his persistence will weaken opposition going forward.

Next up - Immigration Reform

Scotjen61 March 22, 2010 - 10:17am

Bullshit. Time to keep fighting. Republicans and their corporate masters love nothing better than an overconfident, complacent Democratic adversary, one that is lulled into inaction by the whines and moans of the temporarily defeated.

Today is Monday, the day after the "Republican Waterloo." Guess who's on TV? Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, and the rest of Rupert's Flying Monkey Circus. Let me know if it sounds like the monkeys have given up.

Meanwhile, on the radio, Savage Weiner and his ilk will continue to rave about the encroachment of communism/socialism/fascism/liberalism to an audience of political zombies that doesn't know or care that Medicare is a government program, you just better keep your dirty government hands off it.

Meanwhile, birdcages and dead fish continue to be decorated with more flying monkey bi-products like the Wall Street Journal, which you can be sure will toe the company line as to the effects of Obama's very modest first step towards universal coverage.

Speaking of corporations, they now can spend unlimited money on political campaigns. Democrats in their wisdom have done absolutely nothing about the latest demented proclamation by the Supreme Clowns' Gang of Five.

As long as there is a corporate media, a corporate party and people willing to sell their votes, there will be a singularly resilient conservative movement. They may change their name to Nice Kitty, but the movement and the party will always be run by cynical crooks. And it will always be supported by guys like Rupert Murdoch.

A monster like that cannot die, so we better stay in the fight.
.
Cows get milked, rubes get bilked,
And fat cats dine on fools and cream.

Jimbo92107 March 22, 2010 - 10:32am

with all that, isn't it amazing that this bill could pass at all?

Think about it. The first President to attempt a health care bill was Teddy Roosevelt (and failed). FDR tried, as did Truman, LBJ (who got Medicare and Medicaid), Nixon, Clinton.

In 2010 it was accomplished, 100 years in the making.

Scotjen61 March 22, 2010 - 10:43am

Yes. The use of the tax apparatus to enforce payments to for-profit corporations is amazing. You can't pass national health care, but you can pass guaranteed profits to big-spending, well-connected cronies. They are two different things. This bill was nothing like the efforts to get access to health care to all Americans that previous administrations tried. As Obama himself noted, the health insurance bill is like the Wall Street bailout:

He likened the measure to fixing the financial system or passing the economic recovery act. “I knew these things might not be popular but I was absolutely positive that it was the right thing to do,’’ he said, adding, “Over time, we will be vindicated for having made these decisions.’’

To me, this is like ancient Egypt where the high priests of Ra assured everyone that only by paying tribute to the wealthy would the god bring the annual inundation of the Nile. If we pay the insurance companies enough, they will bring health care.

nihil obstet March 22, 2010 - 11:18am

I started a modest cult of sun worshipers in high school, "The Suns of Ra." As high priest, I collected all dues and printed t-shirts. On Wednesdays in lunch hall the faithful would rise, say "praise be," and sweep the right hand from east to west. Then we'd talk about what a bummer the battle of Koresh was, when Ramses II got his ass kicked by a bunch of Hittites. That was pretty much it, until our war with the Sons of Cali later that year.

We never did get much involved with annual inundations, as the Mississippi river rarely runs short of water. And we had absolutely no connection to any insurance companies. I would have noticed. Anyway, our organization never pushed the modest progress of the health care bill, but Suns of Ra do claim credit for global warming.
.
Cows get milked, rubes get bilked,
And fat cats dine on fools and cream.

Jimbo92107 March 22, 2010 - 2:37pm

Well, of course the Mississippi is going to give you an annual inundation whether the pyramid laborers hand over their earnings or not!

nihil obstet March 22, 2010 - 2:44pm

... then it is pretty clear that this was a victory for the Democrats no matter how flawed the bill is.

I sincerely hope that Robert Reich is right in that this will change the public perception of the usefulness of the Federal government.

Overall - although I am grossly generalizing here - Americans have a deeply ambivalent and neurotic relationship to their central government. Anything that helps to make this a bit more healthy and brings it a bit closer to a democratic normality is a good thing.

quax March 22, 2010 - 11:28am

What Republicans and their corporate masters fear most is not the bill as it is, but how it may evolve into a single-payer universal system of health care.

We should all get behind and push our representatives for modifications in that direction.
.
Cows get milked, rubes get bilked,
And fat cats dine on fools and cream.

Jimbo92107 March 22, 2010 - 2:45pm

Millions of people may now have access to health care who otherwise wouldn't. What will their premiums be? For everyone else, will their premiums go down or at least stabilize? Lifetime limits on costs are going away, which is good, but the health insurance industry is still going to act as gatekeeper over the definition of usual and customary care vs. experimental treatments. Who is going to police the health insurance companies? They are still going to expect their 15% ROEs.

For David Frum to be right about this being a Republican Waterloo, the average person is going to have to see immediate changes that benefit them personally, and these changes are then going to have to persist. This is still a pretty big challenge for the Obama administration, and the only way he ultimately will be successful here is if he has proven to the insurance companies that the glory days of huge profits and high stock prices are over. Judging by how successful Obama was with convincing the banks to scale back their bonuses and profits, I doubt either the insurance companies or big pharmaceuticals are going to be acting any differently.

Numerian March 22, 2010 - 11:55am

My thought is that in the short-term we'll see rates (continue to) go up, then (I hope) stabilize sometime next year and maybe even drop a little.

The Latter would be contingent on what goes into the Reconciliation package, since I don't believe there's much incentive in the current Bill to change behaviour.

The fight's not over yet---we just landed a good heavy blow in Round 2. Bell's rung, we're catching breath---Round 3's about to start.....

"If Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -- Will Rogers

justadood March 22, 2010 - 12:35pm

My insurance went up 60% in the past year, family plan/self employed/buy direct. It is up about 90% in the past two years. There is no relief in this bill for me, none. The premiums are onerous. I could buy a large home in a hot real estate market for what I pay.

The question now is, what happened to the 100% write off for premiums that the self employed have had the past several years? I couldn't get an answer form my senators or representative. If they take that away, expect a full scale rebellion by the self employed.

I see no benefit. If pre-existing conditions rules would help and you're an adult, wait four years. The insurance exchange is a joke. We'll see what impacts people in the short term.

But one thing for sure, premiums won't be controlled, not one bit, if for no other reason that they've been raising them in anticipation of this bill. Standindg pat for a year or 10% represents a huge gain when you factor in the increases pre HCR. Why should the insurance companies do anything. They now have a captive audience, literally.

This is a disaster for the Democrats. They've done insurance reform without the reform or control. There are huge constituencies who will see no benefit and some harm. The exclusion of people will continue, pre-existing conditions discrimination will continue, and the public health funding, which is good, won't materialize for years in terms of impact since we're short of providers.

The Republicans won't benefit for more than one cycle. They have no solution to health care.

Pandora's box was opened. The public right to health care is now established. What either party does about it determines it's future, as far as this issue goes.

Michael Collins March 22, 2010 - 3:32pm

Sausage is suing the healthcare bill for defamation.

That was one fugly process.

AMC March 22, 2010 - 11:56am

My marker for Obama was whether he'd get a health care bill with a public option. He didn't. A year ago passage of some sort of health care reform seemed inevitable, and not a tremendous challenge. Only a year of dithering and bipartisaning and gangs of wankers and pre-compromising and, frankly, failure to put forward something simple and popular jeopardized it.

The bill's more good than bad, but it isn't what we should have gotten. It isn't what we voted for.

Not EPIC FAIL, but FAIL nonetheless. And I very much doubt this is the Repubs Waterloo, either. The Dems passed Romneycare, and assumed responsibily for the U.S. healthcare system for the next 3 years.

Tim March 22, 2010 - 1:44pm

this was a battle between Republicans and Democrats.

It never was, not for a single moment (that is - unless you think this all happened completely by accident, everybody in Obama's strategy team believed the Republicans would play nice and vote their conscience rather than sticking to rote obstructionism, and Obama's team "got lucky" and passed this by blind chance).

"Zero Republican votes" was a foregone conclusion; that strategy was stated overtly at the beginning of Obama's tenure. This was almost completely a battle between the right and left wings of the Democratic Party (or, defined in absolute rather than local terms, the "hard right" and "moderate" wings, since the Democratic Party contains maybe two or three people recognizable as "left" from an international perspective). The necessary battles were fought there and that's where the necessary compromises were made.

It wasn't loaded with concessions to win the support of Republicans. It contained exactly as many compromises as were needed to gain the support of the Democratic Hard Right in order be able to pass this without a single Republican vote. And once you've grasped that - judging from the narrowness of the internecine victory, that bill didn't contain as much as a single unnecessary compromise.

Frum sees the enormity of what just happened; he grasps the thoroughness with which the right has aided and abetted its own defeat. It ain't the bill itself, which has good features but really is pretty obviously a bloated piece of crap that needs immediate fixes - it's the assumptions the bill enshrines. The Overton Window has been moved, the social fabric has been irrevocably altered, and this will swiftly become the same kind of "third rail" that Social Security has been for generations. The fixes will happen.

On a side note - I'm just laughing my ass off at the way student loans were just nationalized as part of the package, to practically no fanfare at all. That's just utterly brilliant strategy - can you imagine what would have happened if that had been introduced as separate legislation? That'll breed some new Democrats for the future - maybe even amongst erstwhile College Republicans :D

IMHO lot of folks have been guilty of seriously underestimating Obama - this is some of the most masterful "big picture" political strategy I have witnessed going down in real-time in my life :D


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch March 22, 2010 - 2:08pm

allowing the other side to think they were winning until the very end. Note to Republicans, a tactical victory is NOT a strategic victory. There are two things Obama had said to the caucus that I remember during his strategy sessions.

One is: If you guys want any more legislation to be passed, you need a strong president. This legislation will make me a strong president. If we want energy reform, financial reform, immigration reform it simply will not happen if this legislation fails to pass, because you guys will have made me a weak president.

The other is: I want the reconciliation vote to come after the Senate Bill vote in the house. (It had originally been the other way around). And when he was asked why: He said, the last conversation I had with Ted Kennedy, he said that this bill is symbolic front and center. Details are important but secondary. It BEGINS the process of providing health care to Americans as a right. I want the reconciliation bill to be second, because that bill is the FIRST improvement to the original legislation. And more improvements will come.

Scotjen61 March 22, 2010 - 3:31pm

political takes on this I've seen. Truly.

Reap the wind...

Michael Collins March 22, 2010 - 3:34pm

Obama has sown the storm.

Scotjen61 March 22, 2010 - 4:12pm

In other words, Obama moved the country an inch to the left and the Democratic Party a mile to the right. Super.

Note that all the concessions were to the Democratic Hard Right, while the arm twisting and threatening was made to what's left of the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.

You're right, it was masterful bit of political strategy. Never mind the friendly fire and civilian casualties...this is electoral politics.

Lex March 22, 2010 - 9:15pm

was a concession by the hard right.

No, I don't see it having moved a mile to the right; quite the opposite. Your existing medical system defined the extreme right-hand fringe of all industrialized nations in the West. The before and after pictures show very significant movement leftwards.

I reckon that was far as it was judged feasible to stretch the American political grid in one go without tearing (you can hear the creaks that indicate it was pretty closely judged) - and far more importantly, while still being able to latch it in its new position with any sort of security (since any snapback will *always* take you in the opposite direction).

I'm starting from the assumption, of course, that the goal was to pass actual legislation rather than to register a futile symbolic protest.


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch March 22, 2010 - 10:40pm

The passing of the Health Care bill is likely a confidence booster for Obama. Let's hope that the added wind in his sail will be enough to settle the Israeli/Palestinian problem once and for all.

I know, one can only hope!


Tolerating prostitution is tolerating abuse and torture of women and children.

adrena March 22, 2010 - 6:40pm

If this was such a defeat for the insurance industry and a victory for the American people, someone please explain why health related stocks rallied like they did today?

But hey, it was worth it to through our mothers, wives, sisters, girlfriends and just regular old friends with the female bits under the bus (even if it was just symbolic), wasn't it. There was a political victory to be had!

Lex March 22, 2010 - 9:07pm

Markets hate uncertainty. The fact they knew what they got now takes risk out of the valuations and so prices will rise in the short term.

What rose was interesting.

The market clearly believes that having an additional 32 million folks having access to health insurance will improve their access to healthcare. Hospitals, medical devices and drugs rose by substantial margins. Markets can see that access translates to enhanced care.

Health insurance stock gains were nominal. They rose I think for the factor of certainty. And I do think that the fact this was going to pass over the past 30 days has been priced into these stocks anyway.

Scotjen61 March 23, 2010 - 2:24pm

I suppose the assumption behind this statement here -

But hey, it was worth it to through our mothers, wives, sisters, girlfriends and just regular old friends with the female bits under the bus (even if it was just symbolic), wasn't it.

- is that an occasional $300 - $600 abortion is the only medical procedure any and all of those currently uninsured "wives, sisters, girlfriends and just regular old friends with the female bits" will ever want in their entire lives, yes?

I just want to be clear on why - in your opinion - finally getting them cancer coverage is "throwing them under the bus", and being willing to sacrifice that coverage on principle over the lack of coverage of an infrequent and sub-$1000 procedure, leaving them with their current "nothing", wouldn't be.


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch March 23, 2010 - 5:44pm

There are women being thrown under the bus but they are women for whom $600 dollars might as well be $6000.

Joaquin March 23, 2010 - 6:15pm

but lest we get confused - the choice here was between "everything - except abortion" and "nothing - also including abortion". Dems needed Stupak and co, that bill passed by a handful of Dem votes - and that choice doesn't require more than two or three seconds reflection.

It sucks, but let's not confuse "not getting someone everything they wanted" - or "everything that's right and fair" - for "throwing someone under the bus".


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch March 23, 2010 - 6:36pm

but I don't know how this whole thing is going to work out.

Joaquin March 23, 2010 - 6:39pm

There's no doubt in my mind that inaction wasn't an option for millions - nor is there any doubt that this was the absolutely best bill you stood any chance of getting at the moment.

I don't like many things in the bill either. But now you've got a place from which to begin reforming health care in the US.


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch March 23, 2010 - 7:07pm

That no one can get an appointment with a doctor because they are all so busy!

Joaquin March 23, 2010 - 7:14pm

USA Today, By Susan Page, March 23

WASHINGTON — Americans by 9 percentage points have a favorable view of the health care overhaul that President Obama signed into law Tuesday, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, a notable turnaround from surveys before the vote that showed a plurality against it.

By 49%-40% those surveyed say it was "a good thing" rather than a bad one that Congress passed the bill. Half describe their reaction in positive terms, as "enthusiastic" or "pleased," while about four in 10 describe it in negative ways, as "disappointed" or "angry."

The largest single group, 48%, calls the bill "a good first step" that should be followed by more action on health care. An additional 4% also have a favorable view, saying the bill makes the most important changes needed in the nation's health care system.


They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm.

Raja March 23, 2010 - 7:08pm

Vandals hit at least five Dem offices nationwide, threaten to ‘assassinate’ children of pro-reform lawmakers.

Yesterday, ThinkProgress reported that several Democratic offices around the nation had been vandalized in the days surrounding the House health care vote. Vandals have struck the Tuscon office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), the Monroe County Democratic Committee headquarters in upstate New York, Rep. Louise Slaughter’s (D-NY) Niagara Falls office, the Knox County Democratic headquarters in Ohio, and the Sedgwick County Democratic Party headquarters in Wichita, KS. The local Rochester ABC affiliate now has more information on the upstate NY vandalism, including an assassination threat against the children of lawmakers who voted for health reform:

No one was inside when the brick was hurled through the Democratic Patry Headquarters on University Avenue. Attached was a note quoting conservative Barry Goldwater: “Exremism [sic] in defense of liberty is no vice”. [...]

[Rep. Louise] Slaughter has been at the center of the push for reform. Last Thursday she received a chilling recorded message at her campaign office. “Assassinate is the word they used…toward the children of lawmakers who voted yes.”

The FBI is now investigating.


They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm.

Raja March 24, 2010 - 10:29am

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.